A number of such toy parachute devices are known. These include the toys taught by the following U.S. Pat. Nos.
2,598,030--H. LE M. Bird; PA0 2,927,753--M. H. Feldman; PA0 2,936,545--C. R. Enterkin; PA0 3,109,257--W. B. Curtis; PA0 3,332,645--W. C. Hansen; PA0 3,513,591--W. C. Hansen; PA0 4,424,643--Tilghman.
The devices taught by these patents suffer disadvantages that the means by which the toys engage the kite string for sliding up the kite string and the means by which the parachute is released from the kite string do not provide for simple, efficient operation.
Most of the patents suffer from a disadvantage that the sliding coupling between with kite string is inadequate. For example, the paper string engaging devices of the two Hansen patents and the ring in Enterkin do not facilitate smooth sliding up the kite string. The link of Hansen U.S. Pat. No. 3,513,591 and the ring in Enterkin do not readily slide back down the kite string. The wheeled runners of Feldman and Tilghman readily become disengaged from the string in gusty wind conditions.
The devices from these patents suffer the disadvantages that they do not lend themselves to closely mimicing the appearance of a human parachute. For example, in the device of Bird the rather complex release mechanism requires a ball coupled to the parachute to be released from engagement in both first and second sleeves. Provision of this ball makes it difficult to closely mimic the appearance of a human parachute.